Jump to content

Post Of The Year 2011 Nominations


tiger_rick

Recommended Posts

  • Awards Moderator

Loki nicely undercutting all the roundabout arguing in the police/Barrow thread:

 

Don't come in here with your actual knowledge, Babylon, we were perfectly happy in our uninformed speculation.

 

Babylon should also get some recognition for adding actual factz to the thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 947
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I'll waffle about this a bit because I actually have some views on this that sort of relate to the OP and it wasn't long ago that I watched it all back. I've come to believe a massive reason WWF in 2000 was so awesome was because Steve Austin wasn't there. I'm not saying he wasn't still a huge draw, but almost from the instant he left to the moment he came back the entire roster benefitted. Rock was obviously more than ready to be the standalone top face, but it was more the heels and midcard that really got to strut their stuff.

 

Austin as a character in 99 and upon his return devoured fucking hours and hours and hours of promo and segment time mainly due to the fact that for the most part, he had warranted it. However, the second he left, a bunch of heels would spend a year avoiding 16 Stunners a night, and the whole show was actually allowed to be "fun" again. Austin's character pretty much meant that if you weren't a bad ass babyface, you were weak, and he was going to stun you and the crowd didn't care. I think of Too Cool as an example of this. Put them in a 6 man with Austin in 99, and he would have stunned them and drank beer to celebrate the team victory. Put them with The Rock in 00 and they would have looked as though they belonged in the top match and The Rock would have nodded small approval to them as well.

 

Similarly, midcarders (heels especially) were allowed to breathe a bit. E&C doing the goofy shit in 99? Stunnered all the way back to The Brood for sure. This pattern actually occurs in a literal sense in 2000, as Austin goes on the hunt for his attacker. Yes there's a context to it, but there's a definite return to the old ways upon his return, and noticably less people got a window to shine in his presence.

 

Ultimately, as great as he was, by late 99, I think his character was so inflexible compared to the rest of the roster around him, that some respite from having to book him gave the company a chance get creative with so many others, and thus 2000 was as good as it was. Most people love large parts of Austin's 2001 heel work because he deviated from the norm, but obviously him and the company panicked about a downswing in business (and I'd wager - his t-shirt sales) and bottled that in November. The less said about his last wrestling days from then on, the better.

 

Luckily, The Rock's so fucking great that none of that was relevant to him. The Rock deserves even more credit for getting over, in my opinion. Randy Savage and Randy Orton respectively had to get over as top faces at the same time as the industry megastar of the time. It's clear neither were able to match Hogan or Cena, but Rocky easily got to Austin's level (and often beyond) and never left. Just because the business was hot, it doesn't mean there would be room at the top for two huge megafaces, but The Rock made it so. He should get more credit for that.

 

Quality post from NEWM about The Rock avoiding Austin's shadow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

6th. He's spot on as well. Just been flicking through some old Power Slam mags, and the letters page and the writers themselves give Austin so much shit when he returned because for about 10 months, WWF's PPV's and TV were filled with top wrestling from Triple H vs the Rock down to Scotty 2 Hotty vs Dean Malenko. When Austin returned, he didnt fit in at all as a babyface. Especially when 3 out of the 5 matches on Raw ended in him doing a run in and slapping both of the people about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think this was by Magnum, fucking hilarious.

 

Hearing the song 'Sk8er Boi' in the gym last night reminded me that I've always been troubled and bemused by its message. As far as I can see, the relevant facts are these: A much-coveted girl at a school is pursued by some scruffy emo. She fancies him as well, but that's neither here nor there because teenage girls have famously terrible taste in men. On this occasion however, she shows maturity beyond her years and heeds the objective advice of her friends (concerned that his awful dress sense and personal hygiene will affect his ability to function in adult society) to give this loser a wide berth.

 

Now, Avril Lavigne seems to be thumbing her nose at the girl for being too shallow here on the basis that, five years on, the Sk8er Boi goes on to be rich and famous. In effect, what she's really saying is that the girl wasn't shallow enough, because she could be enjoying the shallow girl's opium of fame and money right now. Shame on you Lavigne, shame on you. As he's now a rock star, there's a fair chance he's also a philandering drug addict, and thus a terrible potential father for the sprog she's landed herself with. What's more, he clearly still dresses like a scruffy cunt, showing a worrying lack of maturity and inability to grow up. I notice the third verse, five years further removed, when he goes on to be Matt Hardy is conspicuous by its absence.

 

The retort by someone about the Matt Hardy 3rd verse was amusing as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...